Xref: news2.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:6612
From: lehmann AT mathematik DOT th-darmstadt DOT de (Alexander Lehmann)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: MSDOS Unzip Program
Date: 30 Jul 1996 18:41:38 GMT
Organization: Technische Hochschule Darmstadt
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <4tll12$1nsr@rs18.hrz.th-darmstadt.de>
References: <Pine DOT NEB DOT 3 DOT 93 DOT 960729151720 DOT 3003A-100000 AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl> <838746600 DOT 16082 DOT 4 AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fb0409.mathematik.th-darmstadt.de
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Alaric B. Williams <alaric AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk> wrote:
: Mark Habersack <grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl> wrote:
: >3.) You have LFNs if you recompile the sources under DJGPP V2 and use it under
: >Win95. Try unpack RHIDE sources without it! Or maybe use WinZip32 (almost 1MB
: >of soft and no cmdline) - no thanks!

: I want LFNs, but I really really really don't want win95 (IT SUCKS). 

: This is a shame.

: Perhaps there is a scope for a DOS TSR LFN driver.

: You'd see SFNs in the DOS utilities... but would they still work?
: Would a disk doctor program see them and think "Oh, LFNs" or would it
: think "This is DOS 6.0, so we won't have any LFNs"?

An old disk utility would probably think the directory is corrupt (the
same in Win95, that's why old dos program may not write to disk
directly). And newer ones will most likely look at the version number
instead of checking for LFN (but most newer DOS utilities will be
win32 console applications, so they won't run on plain DOS anyway).


bye, Alexander

-- 
Alexander Lehmann,                                  |  "On the Internet,
alex AT hal DOT rhein-main DOT de  (plain, MIME, NeXT)         |   nobody knows
lehmann AT mathematik DOT th-darmstadt DOT de (plain)          |   you're a dog."
!!CHANGED!! <URL:http://www.mathematik.th-darmstadt.de/~lehmann/>